Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

[Guest guest]

What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and it's effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and it becomes the new "IT" drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and every medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn widely available and the world becomes a better and healthier place. Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just trying to understand the potential outcome. It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go in order to keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al wouldn't do all in their power to keep it off the market for that very reason. Help am I missing the forest for the trees? Gigi <davidtaylor@...> wrote: The problem is that insurance companies are really in favour of high priced treatments because that gives them the fear factor on which to base there marketing strategy. If all treatment was within the reach of average people then there would be no reason to buy health insurance. There are many cheap treatments for most things but orthodox medicine rubishes them to keep the expensive things in business, that give bucks for advertising, funding charities, political parties, fear to sell doctors time and medical insurance. LDN is only one drug but look how much that would knock out of the system if it was used for all it works for. How many neurologists would now be out of work if it had been in mass use just for MS for the last 20 years? Dave Message: 3 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:35:35 -0000 From: "morrrelll" <bmr323@...>Subject: Funding a Study for LDN and MSIn my opinion, the two most logical places to campaign for funding for studies to gain approval for LDN in the treatment of MS are with the non-profit MS organizations who should have ALREADY funded the studies on their own, and with the health insurance companies, most notably Blue Cross. With profits as a detracting feature for pharmaceutical companies, it would seem that MILLIONS could be

saved by insurance companies if LDN proved to be a worthy substitute for the ABCRs. It certainly has replaced them for me, and the total cost of LDN is lower than the co-pay for the ABCRs.The problem here, however, lies in being able to actually talk to a human being at the insurance company. I think it's easier to find a four-leaf clover in a lawn of zoysia than talking to a person at Blue Cross. Thanks, BMR

Brings words and photos together (easily) with PhotoMail - it's free and works with .

[Guest guest]

Hi Gigi,

It is hard to say what the actual effect of successful trials would be, but I can say this: LDN can be produced by any company so there can be competition. The patient ran out many years ago.

When drug companies study or develop a new drug they have in mind the patent protecting them from competition for a certain period of time. That way they can charge what they feel they can get away with (or what the insurance companies are willing to pay). This of course is fair to a certain extent because they put the money and resources together to bring the new drug into being. There does need to be a way to make money with it to make it worth their while. But where does that leave old drugs that might work better than new drugs? This is where our system goes very wrong, in my opinion.

Aletha

Funding a Study for LDN and MSIn my opinion, the two most logical places to campaign for funding for studies to gain approval for LDN in the treatment of MS are with the non-profit MS organizations who should have ALREADY funded the studies on their own, and with the health insurance companies, most notably Blue Cross. With profits as a detracting feature for pharmaceutical companies, it would seem that MILLIONS could be saved by insurance companies if LDN proved to be a worthy substitute for the ABCRs. It certainly has replaced them for me, and the total cost of LDN is lower than the co-pay for the ABCRs.The problem here, however, lies in being able to actually talk to a human being at the insurance company. I think it's easier to find a four-leaf clover in a lawn of zoysia than talking to a person at Blue Cross. Thanks, BMR

Brings words and photos together (easily) withPhotoMail - it's free and works with .

[Guest guest]

Gigi

Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which means the price will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities then this will not get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it more widely accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed. If LDN had been trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it is and then licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by all the licensed treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to cure every sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly think it would be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce in size with out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no where near that, but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and Cancer and slowly spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business and all businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra demand for their products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look at the way natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to solve a problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as benign as LDN. In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures scurvy, let alone anything else.

Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say treatments not pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance. If sickness was abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to the medical business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness tomorrow, but if science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do a lot better than we are now.

Dave

Message: 4 Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST) From: gigi held <georgina374@...>Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MSWhat does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and it's effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and it becomes the new "IT" drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and every medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn widely available and the world becomes a better and healthier place. Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just trying to understand the potential outcome. It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go in order to keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al wouldn't do all in their power to keep it off the market for that very reason. Help am I missing the forest for the trees? Gigi

[Guest guest]

This is very, VERY true. It's the same as with fuel for automobiles.

Cars could have been running on Hydrogen years ago, and probably a

hundred other more economical, ecologically friendly, and in greater

supply, methods could also have been developed if the petroleum

companies weren't so powerful.

That being said, I still fully intend to keep voicing my desire to

see someone fund the trials needed to get LDN approved. That

approval could very well lead to other inexpensive treatments being

approved for any number of things.

Our politicians are always railing about rampant health costs. Call

or write your legislators; call your local TV and radio stations.

Make noise........LOUD noise- loud enough to be heard. That's what

I'm doing. I'll be even louder if it works. :-) Bill

>

> If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic, olive

oil and

> pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be willing

to invest

> the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get such a

treatment

> approved because nobody would be making money on it, and besides

that, it

> would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the past

year Teva,

> the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's right,

eight million

> dollars) on Copaxon alone – which I am sure everybody agrees is

quite a

> golden egg.

>

> The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the drug

companies

> work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: low dose naltrexone

> [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> low dose naltrexone

> Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

>

>

>

> Gigi

>

>

>

> Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which means

the price

> will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities then

this will not

> get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it more

widely

> accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed. If LDN

had been

> trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it is

and then

> licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by all

the licensed

> treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to cure

every

> sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly think

it would

> be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce in

size with

> out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no where

near that,

> but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and Cancer

and slowly

> spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business and

all

> businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra demand for

their

> products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look at

the way

> natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to

solve a

> problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as benign

as LDN.

> In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

scurvy, let

> alone anything else.

>

>

>

> Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

treatments not

> pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance. If

sickness was

> abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to the

medical

> business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness tomorrow, but

if

> science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do a lot

better

> than we are now.

>

>

>

> Dave

>

>

>

> Message: 4

> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@...> georgina374@...>

> Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

>

> What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and

it's

> effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and it

becomes

> the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and

every

> medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn widely

available

> and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just trying

to

> understand the potential outcome.

>

> It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go in

order to

> keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al wouldn't

do all in

> their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

>

> Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

>

> Gigi

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Super Post ,

Thanks! ~Hugs~ Russ:))

>

> Gigi

>

> Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which means

the price will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities

then this will not get it a licence for MS or anything else but it

may get it more widely accepted by doctors and therefore easier to

get prescribed. If LDN had been trialed in 1986 and proved as

effective as most of us think it is and then licensed for MS it

would have stopped all the money made by all the licensed

treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to cure

every sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly

think it would be sold and every hospital and drug company would

just reduce in size with out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN

is of course no where near that, but it is effecting the sales of

licensed drugs for MS and Cancer and slowly spreading to other

conditions. Western Medicine is a business and all businesses in a

capitalist economy want to create extra demand for their products

and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look at the way

natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to

solve a problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as

benign as LDN. In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C

cures scurvy, let alone anything else.

>

> Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

treatments not pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for

instance. If sickness was abolished tomorrow look at the problems

that would cause to the medical business. I am not saying we could

abolish sickness tomorrow, but if science and not money were at the

helm we would certainly do a lot better than we are now.

>

> Dave

>

> Message: 4

> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> From: gigi held <georgina374@...>

> Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

>

> What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and

it's effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and

it becomes the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial

it and every medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making

ldn widely available and the world becomes a better and healthier

place.

> Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just trying

to understand the potential outcome.

>

> It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go in

order to keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al

wouldn't do all in their power to keep it off the market for that

very reason.

>

> Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

>

> Gigi

>

[Guest guest]

Hey, thank you, Yaacov ~ for posting this & solving the " Teva "

riddle for me...lol " Teva,> the company that makes Copaxon " ... So,

while Teva is not the Pres and CEO of MSAA, he (it)is still a player

against Tysabri and low cost medical alernatives

~Less confused Hugs~ Russ:))

>

> If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic, olive

oil and

> pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be willing

to invest

> the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get such a

treatment

> approved because nobody would be making money on it, and besides

that, it

> would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the past

year Teva,

> the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's right,

eight million

> dollars) on Copaxon alone – which I am sure everybody agrees is

quite a

> golden egg.

>

> The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the drug

companies

> work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

>

>

>

> _____

>

> From: low dose naltrexone

> [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> low dose naltrexone

> Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

>

>

>

> Gigi

>

>

>

> Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which means

the price

> will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities then

this will not

> get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it more

widely

> accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed. If LDN

had been

> trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it is

and then

> licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by all

the licensed

> treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to cure

every

> sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly think

it would

> be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce in

size with

> out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no where

near that,

> but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and Cancer

and slowly

> spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business and

all

> businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra demand for

their

> products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look at

the way

> natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to

solve a

> problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as benign

as LDN.

> In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

scurvy, let

> alone anything else.

>

>

>

> Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

treatments not

> pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance. If

sickness was

> abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to the

medical

> business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness tomorrow, but

if

> science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do a lot

better

> than we are now.

>

>

>

> Dave

>

>

>

> Message: 4

> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@...> georgina374@...>

> Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

>

> What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and

it's

> effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and it

becomes

> the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and

every

> medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn widely

available

> and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just trying

to

> understand the potential outcome.

>

> It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go in

order to

> keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al wouldn't

do all in

> their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

>

> Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

>

> Gigi

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think most of us respect your point of view, Bill I, for one,

feel that if something is worth doing, it's worth doing wrong ~ and

then, if necessary, doing it over until we can get it

right! ...lol...~Hugs~ Russ:))

> >

> > If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic,

olive

> oil and

> > pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be willing

> to invest

> > the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get such

a

> treatment

> > approved because nobody would be making money on it, and besides

> that, it

> > would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the

past

> year Teva,

> > the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's right,

> eight million

> > dollars) on Copaxon alone – which I am sure everybody agrees is

> quite a

> > golden egg.

> >

> > The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the

drug

> companies

> > work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

> >

> >

> >

> > _____

> >

> > From: low dose naltrexone

> > [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

>

> > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> > low dose naltrexone

> > Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and

MS

> >

> >

> >

> > Gigi

> >

> >

> >

> > Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which

means

> the price

> > will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities then

> this will not

> > get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it more

> widely

> > accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed. If

LDN

> had been

> > trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it

is

> and then

> > licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by all

> the licensed

> > treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to

cure

> every

> > sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly

think

> it would

> > be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce in

> size with

> > out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no where

> near that,

> > but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and

Cancer

> and slowly

> > spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business

and

> all

> > businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra demand

for

> their

> > products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look at

> the way

> > natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to

> solve a

> > problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as

benign

> as LDN.

> > In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

> scurvy, let

> > alone anything else.

> >

> >

> >

> > Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

> treatments not

> > pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance. If

> sickness was

> > abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to the

> medical

> > business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness tomorrow,

but

> if

> > science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do a

lot

> better

> > than we are now.

> >

> >

> >

> > Dave

> >

> >

> >

> > Message: 4

> > Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> > From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@> georgina374@>

> > Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> >

> > What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and

> it's

> > effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and

it

> becomes

> > the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and

> every

> > medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn widely

> available

> > and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> > Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just

trying

> to

> > understand the potential outcome.

> >

> > It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go

in

> order to

> > keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al

wouldn't

> do all in

> > their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

> >

> > Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

> >

> > Gigi

_____

[Guest guest]

Hey I think your " 2 cents " is more valuable than many

nickels...~Hugs~ Russ:))

>

> > Gigi

> >

> > Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce

> > it which means the price will remain low. If it is

> > trailed by one of the charities then this will not

> > get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may

> > get it more widely accepted by doctors and therefore

> > easier to get prescribed. If LDN had been trialed in

> > 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it

> > is and then licensed for MS it would have stopped

> > all the money made by all the licensed treatments.

> > Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to

> > cure every sickness and say that cost £100 per

> > patient, do you honestly think it would be sold and

> > every hospital and drug company would just reduce in

> > size with out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN

> > is of course no where near that, but it is effecting

> > the sales of licensed drugs for MS and Cancer and

> > slowly spreading to other conditions. Western

> > Medicine is a business and all businesses in a

> > capitalist economy want to create extra demand for

> > their products and eliminate as much competition as

> > they can. Look at the way natural health is

> > rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to solve

> > a problem with a health supplement rather than a

> > drug even as benign as LDN. In the western world it

> > is illegal to claim vitamin C cures scurvy, let

> > alone anything else.

> >

> > Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should

> > we say treatments not pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife

> > or Otto Warburg for instance. If sickness was

> > abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would

> > cause to the medical business. I am not saying we

> > could abolish sickness tomorrow, but if science and

> > not money were at the helm we would certainly do a

> > lot better than we are now.

> >

> > Dave

> >

> > Message: 4

> > Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> > From: gigi held <georgina374@...>

> > Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> >

> > What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword?

> > Trial it and it's effectiveness creates havoc in the

> > establishment. Trial it and it becomes the new " IT "

> > drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and

> > every medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience,

> > making ldn widely available and the world becomes a

> > better and healthier place.

> > Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib,

> > I'm just trying to understand the potential outcome.

> >

> >

> > It seems that private funds for a trial might be the

> > way to go in order to keep it fairly priced, if

> > indeed the drug companies et'al wouldn't do all in

> > their power to keep it off the market for that very

> > reason.

> >

> > Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

> >

> > Gigi

> >

> >

>

>

> __________________________________________________

>

[Guest guest]

Rae,

I totally agree. At the very least the NMSS isn't constrained by a

profit motive and in spite of the most cynical here, I believe there

are some members of the NMSS who really want to help people with MS

and would even be overjoyed at finding a cure.

I know this MonSter can color one's whole outlook but I prefer to

see the best in people. The problem is, how to put some serious

pressure on the Society (this is one example of where they are

obviously not " trying to find a cure " ). At least they don't just

dismiss LDN out of hand but they are spending Millions on

traditional approaches while ignoring LDN.

Larry

> > >

> > > If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic,

> olive

> > oil and

> > > pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be

willing

> > to invest

> > > the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get

such

> a

> > treatment

> > > approved because nobody would be making money on it, and

besides

> > that, it

> > > would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the

> past

> > year Teva,

> > > the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's right,

> > eight million

> > > dollars) on Copaxon alone – which I am sure everybody agrees

is

> > quite a

> > > golden egg.

> > >

> > > The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the

> drug

> > companies

> > > work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > _____

> > >

> > > From: low dose naltrexone

> > > [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

> >

> > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> > > low dose naltrexone

> > > Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN

and

> MS

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Gigi

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which

> means

> > the price

> > > will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities then

> > this will not

> > > get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it

more

> > widely

> > > accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed. If

> LDN

> > had been

> > > trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it

> is

> > and then

> > > licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by

all

> > the licensed

> > > treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to

> cure

> > every

> > > sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly

> think

> > it would

> > > be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce

in

> > size with

> > > out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no

where

> > near that,

> > > but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and

> Cancer

> > and slowly

> > > spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business

> and

> > all

> > > businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra demand

> for

> > their

> > > products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look

at

> > the way

> > > natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish

to

> > solve a

> > > problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as

> benign

> > as LDN.

> > > In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

> > scurvy, let

> > > alone anything else.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

> > treatments not

> > > pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance.

If

> > sickness was

> > > abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to

the

> > medical

> > > business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness tomorrow,

> but

> > if

> > > science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do a

> lot

> > better

> > > than we are now.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Dave

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Message: 4

> > > Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> > > From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@> georgina374@>

> > > Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> > >

> > > What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it

and

> > it's

> > > effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it

and

> it

> > becomes

> > > the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it

and

> > every

> > > medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn

widely

> > available

> > > and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> > > Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just

> trying

> > to

> > > understand the potential outcome.

> > >

> > > It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go

> in

> > order to

> > > keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al

> wouldn't

> > do all in

> > > their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

> > >

> > > Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

> > >

> > > Gigi

> _____

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't believe the only reason we don't have hydrogen cars (or

solar powered cars) is beause of the Petrochemical Industry. I

think there are some serious logistical problems (note the

Hindenberg for a very old scare).

Hydrogen is difficult to store and transport. How would gas

stations work? If we all know that Gasoline is a volitile liquid,

hydrogen is much more so. I'm not even sure how Liquid Hydrogen is

transported but I wonder if the infrastructure for moving large

amounts of such low temperature and higly volitile liquids is well

understood.

I know the early attempts at mass transit in Los Angeles were

sabotaged by Big Oil but I think there is more to the resistance of

Hydrogen cars then commercial interests.

I believe there are many knowledgeable medical researchers who are

idealistic and smart enough to trial LDN. I think we need to

pressure the NMSS to live up to their stated goal of " finding a

cure " .

Larry

> >

> > If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic,

olive

> oil and

> > pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be willing

> to invest

> > the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get such

a

> treatment

> > approved because nobody would be making money on it, and besides

> that, it

> > would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the

past

> year Teva,

> > the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's right,

> eight million

> > dollars) on Copaxon alone – which I am sure everybody agrees is

> quite a

> > golden egg.

> >

> > The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the

drug

> companies

> > work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

> >

> >

> >

> > _____

> >

> > From: low dose naltrexone

> > [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

>

> > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> > low dose naltrexone

> > Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and

MS

> >

> >

> >

> > Gigi

> >

> >

> >

> > Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which

means

> the price

> > will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities then

> this will not

> > get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it more

> widely

> > accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed. If

LDN

> had been

> > trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think it

is

> and then

> > licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by all

> the licensed

> > treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to

cure

> every

> > sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly

think

> it would

> > be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce in

> size with

> > out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no where

> near that,

> > but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and

Cancer

> and slowly

> > spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business

and

> all

> > businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra demand

for

> their

> > products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look at

> the way

> > natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish to

> solve a

> > problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as

benign

> as LDN.

> > In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

> scurvy, let

> > alone anything else.

> >

> >

> >

> > Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

> treatments not

> > pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance. If

> sickness was

> > abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to the

> medical

> > business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness tomorrow,

but

> if

> > science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do a

lot

> better

> > than we are now.

> >

> >

> >

> > Dave

> >

> >

> >

> > Message: 4

> > Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> > From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@> georgina374@>

> > Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> >

> > What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it and

> it's

> > effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it and

it

> becomes

> > the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it and

> every

> > medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn widely

> available

> > and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> > Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just

trying

> to

> > understand the potential outcome.

> >

> > It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to go

in

> order to

> > keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al

wouldn't

> do all in

> > their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

> >

> > Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

> >

> > Gigi

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Aletha,

I don't put much faith in using our political leaders as I don't

think this subject fits in their " job description " but I do think

bombarding the MS society with hundreds or even better thousands of

letters might have an impact.

Does anyone know how many people are using LDN for MS? I know the

LDM Research Trist (in England) has some knowledge of that.

One " problem " with LDN is how broadly effective it is (my

neurologist in Southern California who specializes in MS for over 50

years, voiced some skepticism about LDN saying that 'it seems like

it is effective for " everything " 'of course everything is related to

the immune system).

This is why it is so importent to get an FDA approved study. People

suffering from this disease are easy pickings for scam artists

because it is so variable. I liked the idea of the news papers or

maybe even a letter to some of the MS magazines.

I still think the NMSS needs to be shamed into funding such a study.

Larry

> > > >

> > > > If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic,

> > olive

> > > oil and

> > > > pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be

> willing

> > > to invest

> > > > the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get

> such

> > a

> > > treatment

> > > > approved because nobody would be making money on it, and

> besides

> > > that, it

> > > > would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the

> > past

> > > year Teva,

> > > > the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's

right,

> > > eight million

> > > > dollars) on Copaxon alone - which I am sure everybody agrees

> is

> > > quite a

> > > > golden egg.

> > > >

> > > > The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the

> > drug

> > > companies

> > > > work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > _____

> > > >

> > > > From: low dose naltrexone

> > > > [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

> > >

> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> > > > low dose naltrexone

> > > > Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN

> and

> > MS

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Gigi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which

> > means

> > > the price

> > > > will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities

then

> > > this will not

> > > > get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it

> more

> > > widely

> > > > accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed.

If

> > LDN

> > > had been

> > > > trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think

it

> > is

> > > and then

> > > > licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by

> all

> > > the licensed

> > > > treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to

> > cure

> > > every

> > > > sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly

> > think

> > > it would

> > > > be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce

> in

> > > size with

> > > > out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no

> where

> > > near that,

> > > > but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and

> > Cancer

> > > and slowly

> > > > spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business

> > and

> > > all

> > > > businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra

demand

> > for

> > > their

> > > > products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look

> at

> > > the way

> > > > natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish

> to

> > > solve a

> > > > problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as

> > benign

> > > as LDN.

> > > > In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

> > > scurvy, let

> > > > alone anything else.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

> > > treatments not

> > > > pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance.

> If

> > > sickness was

> > > > abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to

> the

> > > medical

> > > > business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness

tomorrow,

> > but

> > > if

> > > > science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do

a

> > lot

> > > better

> > > > than we are now.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Dave

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Message: 4

> > > > Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> > > > From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@> georgina374@>

> > > > Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> > > >

> > > > What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it

> and

> > > it's

> > > > effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it

> and

> > it

> > > becomes

> > > > the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it

> and

> > > every

> > > > medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn

> widely

> > > available

> > > > and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> > > > Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just

> > trying

> > > to

> > > > understand the potential outcome.

> > > >

> > > > It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to

go

> > in

> > > order to

> > > > keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al

> > wouldn't

> > > do all in

> > > > their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

> > > >

> > > > Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

> > > >

> > > > Gigi

> > _____

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Sorry I've taken so long to respond to this. I have been writing

back and forth to the NMSS for a while now, and in my last

correspondence, I suggested that publicity concerning their FUNDING

of a study to seek the approval of LDN could generate a marked

increase in donations, while publicity to the contrary might have

the exact opposite effect. I haven't received a response from that

yet.

I also have written to Blue Cross concerning THEIR funding the

study, but I haven't heard from them either. I'm still trying to

find a way to reach a human being at Blue Cross to vocally discuss

the issue.

> > > >

> > > > If some doctors found that the right combination of garlic,

> > olive

> > > oil and

> > > > pepper cured cancer you can be sure that nobody would be

> willing

> > > to invest

> > > > the millions of dollars needed to do clinical trials to get

> such

> > a

> > > treatment

> > > > approved because nobody would be making money on it, and

> besides

> > > that, it

> > > > would kill the goose that is laying many golden eggs. In the

> > past

> > > year Teva,

> > > > the company that makes Copaxon, made $8,000,000 (that's

right,

> > > eight million

> > > > dollars) on Copaxon alone - which I am sure everybody agrees

> is

> > > quite a

> > > > golden egg.

> > > >

> > > > The film The Constant Gardner gives a good picture of how the

> > drug

> > > companies

> > > > work and what their level of ethics and morality are.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > _____

> > > >

> > > > From: low dose naltrexone

> > > > [mailto:low dose naltrexone ] On Behalf Of

> > >

> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 7:02 PM

> > > > low dose naltrexone

> > > > Subject: [low dose naltrexone] Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN

> and

> > MS

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Gigi

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Naltrexone is a generic drug, so anyone can produce it which

> > means

> > > the price

> > > > will remain low. If it is trailed by one of the charities

then

> > > this will not

> > > > get it a licence for MS or anything else but it may get it

> more

> > > widely

> > > > accepted by doctors and therefore easier to get prescribed.

If

> > LDN

> > > had been

> > > > trialed in 1986 and proved as effective as most of us think

it

> > is

> > > and then

> > > > licensed for MS it would have stopped all the money made by

> all

> > > the licensed

> > > > treatments. Let us suppose that a single pill was invented to

> > cure

> > > every

> > > > sickness and say that cost £100 per patient, do you honestly

> > think

> > > it would

> > > > be sold and every hospital and drug company would just reduce

> in

> > > size with

> > > > out a fuss, of course they would not. LDN is of course no

> where

> > > near that,

> > > > but it is effecting the sales of licensed drugs for MS and

> > Cancer

> > > and slowly

> > > > spreading to other conditions. Western Medicine is a business

> > and

> > > all

> > > > businesses in a capitalist economy want to create extra

demand

> > for

> > > their

> > > > products and eliminate as much competition as they can. Look

> at

> > > the way

> > > > natural health is rubbished and regulated, who would not wish

> to

> > > solve a

> > > > problem with a health supplement rather than a drug even as

> > benign

> > > as LDN.

> > > > In the western world it is illegal to claim vitamin C cures

> > > scurvy, let

> > > > alone anything else.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Look at some of the suppressed treatments or should we say

> > > treatments not

> > > > pursued for Cancer, Royal Rife or Otto Warburg for instance.

> If

> > > sickness was

> > > > abolished tomorrow look at the problems that would cause to

> the

> > > medical

> > > > business. I am not saying we could abolish sickness

tomorrow,

> > but

> > > if

> > > > science and not money were at the helm we would certainly do

a

> > lot

> > > better

> > > > than we are now.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Dave

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Message: 4

> > > > Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 13:03:17 -0800 (PST)

> > > > From: gigi held < <mailto:georgina374@> georgina374@>

> > > > Subject: Re: RE:Funding a Study for LDN and MS

> > > >

> > > > What does this mean? Is it a double edged sword? Trial it

> and

> > > it's

> > > > effectiveness creates havoc in the establishment. Trial it

> and

> > it

> > > becomes

> > > > the new " IT " drug at a no longer affordable rate. Trial it

> and

> > > every

> > > > medical nay sayer suddenly grows a conscience, making ldn

> widely

> > > available

> > > > and the world becomes a better and healthier place.

> > > > Wow, what a concept. I'm really not being glib, I'm just

> > trying

> > > to

> > > > understand the potential outcome.

> > > >

> > > > It seems that private funds for a trial might be the way to

go

> > in

> > > order to

> > > > keep it fairly priced, if indeed the drug companies et'al

> > wouldn't

> > > do all in

> > > > their power to keep it off the market for that very reason.

> > > >

> > > > Help am I missing the forest for the trees?

> > > >

> > > > Gigi

> > _____

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >